↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Clinical and laboratory characteristics associated with a high optical density anti-platelet factor 4 ELISA test

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Blood Medicine, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
8 Mendeley
Title
Clinical and laboratory characteristics associated with a high optical density anti-platelet factor 4 ELISA test
Published in
Journal of Blood Medicine, November 2015
DOI 10.2147/jbm.s90179
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benjamin Y Lu, David Kudlowitz, Lawrence B Gardner

Abstract

Diagnosing heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, a potentially catastrophic immune-mediated disorder, continues to pose significant challenges for clinicians, as both clinical and laboratory tools lack specificity. There is mounting evidence supporting a positive correlation between definitive heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and optical density (OD) positivity from the widely available anti-platelet factor 4 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (PF4 ELISAs). However, the clinical features distinguishing these patients remain poorly understood. To better characterize this group, we conducted a case-controlled, retrospective chart review of patients from two large, urban academic institutions who underwent a PF4 ELISA at a central laboratory. Associations between OD and 18 clinical characteristics were calculated using the Fisher's exact test for categorical variables and Wilcoxon rank-sum test for continuous variables. In total, 184 negative patients (OD <0.7), and 121 positive patients (OD >0.7), including 74 low-positive patients (0.7< OD <1.4) and 47 high-positive patients (OD >1.4) were identified. Several clinical variables were significantly different in the negative group compared with the positive group, including hospital day (P<0.001), previous admission within the past 3 months (P<0.001), and the presence of a new thrombus (P=0.003). However, many of these variables were not different between the negative and low-positive group, and were only distinct between the negative and high-positive group. When the low-positive and high-positive groups were compared, only the 4T score was significantly different (P=0.003). These data indicate that those with OD >1.4 form a distinct clinical group and support the clinical utility of the 4T score.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 8 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 25%
Other 1 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 13%
Researcher 1 13%
Other 2 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 63%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 November 2015.
All research outputs
#15,351,145
of 22,834,308 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Blood Medicine
#147
of 288 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,562
of 284,458 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Blood Medicine
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,834,308 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 288 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 284,458 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.